Show HN: adamsreview – better multi-agent PR reviews for Claude Code

Description and use

**Brief Summary (2‑3 sentences)**
*adamsreview* is an open‑source framework that turns ad‑hoc Claude‑based prompts and tools into repeatable, multi‑agent pull‑request review workflows. By orchestrating several Claude agents, it lets teams coordinate complex code‑review tasks, inject tool‑use pipelines, and maintain a shared memory store for consistent decision‑making.

**Value**

• **From isolated prompts to reusable pipelines:** Instead of manually running Claude for each PR, *adamsreview* bundles prompts, tool calls, and state handling into a single orchestrated flow.
• **Multi‑agent collaboration:** Different agents can specialize (e.g., style linting, security scanning, architectural review) and pass results to one another, producing richer, more thorough feedback.
• **Standardised memory:** A built‑in memory layer lets agents recall prior comments or project‑wide conventions, reducing duplicated effort and improving consistency across reviews.

**Practical Adoption Path**

| Step | Action | Reason |
|------|--------|--------|
| 1️⃣ | **Clone & explore** the repo; run the provided example workflow on a sandbox repo. | Verify that the basic orchestration works with your Claude API key. |
| 2️⃣ | **Define your agents** – fork the sample prompt files to create agents for the review aspects you need (e.g., security, style, performance). | Tailor the pipeline to your team’s code‑review checklist. |
| 3️⃣ | **Integrate with your VCS** – hook the adamsreview CLI or HTTP endpoint into your PR‑creation webhook (GitHub Actions, GitLab CI, etc.). | Automate the trigger so every new PR runs the multi‑agent review. |
| 4️⃣ | **Add a manual gate** – configure the CI step to post the generated review as a draft comment and require a human to approve before merging. | Mitigates the “sparse integration signals” risk and lets you validate output quality. |
| 5️⃣ | **Iterate & monitor** – collect feedback from reviewers, adjust prompts, and optionally add more tool‑use steps (e.g., static analysis, test‑run results). | Refine the workflow and gradually increase automation confidence. |
| 6️⃣ | **Production hardening** – lock dependency versions, add health checks, and set up alerting for API‑quota or Claude‑service failures. | Ensures stability for long‑term internal or external use. |

**Production Readiness**

• **Maturity:** Rated *Medium*. The project is recent (last update 2026‑05‑11) and functional for prototypes or internal tooling, but it lacks extensive documentation, a clear release cadence, and broad community adoption.
• **Risks:** Sparse integration metadata means you should verify the license, review open issues, and confirm that the Claude API version you rely on is stable. Dependency and maintenance checks are essential before scaling.
• **When to go live:** After completing the manual‑inspection gate and establishing monitoring around Claude API limits, the framework can be promoted to production for internal code‑review pipelines. For external‑facing services, additional safeguards (rate‑limiting, audit logs, fallback reviewers) are recommended.

Use in a workflow

Show HN: adamsreview – better multi-agent PR reviews for Claude Code helps turn isolated prompts and tools into repeatable agent workflows.

• coordinate multi-agent workflows
• add tool-use pipelines
• standardize agent memory

Limitations and review notes

Medium: useful for prototypes or internal workflows, with dependency and maintenance checks before production.